Page:The New International Encyclopædia 1st ed. v. 14.djvu/384

NEGATIVE QUANTITY. a34 NEGLIGENCE. negative nutatiun luis agaiu a definite natural iiK'uning. Negative (juantities have been thorouglily un- derstood only within recent times. Although Hero of Alexandria in his Stereotnetrica con- sidered the expression * 81 — 144 as possil)le, the result is recorded as 8 — 1/1(), wliieh sliows that negative quantities were not understood by the Greeks. The Hindus were more suc- cessful, 'for Aryabhatta, e.530, distinguislied between dhana (assets), positive quantities, and kshaya (liabilities), negative numbers, liliaskara, c.11.50, was aware that a square root can be both positive and negative, and that V — a does not exist for the ordinary num- ber-system. -M-Khuwari/.mi, c.8.30, a celebrated mathematician under the Arab supremacy, ob- tained two roots for the (|uadratic equation, but the negative roots were rejecteil as not valid. Among the early Eurojiean matheinaticians, Fi- bonacci (1202) went no further than the Arabs. Paccioli (1494) definitely stated the rule, minus times minus alicays gives plus; but this fact was known to the Arabs and Hindus, Bhaskara, for example, having stated that the square of a negative numl)er is always positive. Cardan ( 1.54.5) recognized negative roots, but called them astimat tones falsa' or ficta: Stifel ( 1.544) called negative numbers nunieri ahsurdi. and Harriot (l();il) was the first to consider such a number capable of forming a member of an equation. Vieta (1.501) distinguished between positive and negative numbers, and Descartes (l(i37) in lu3 geometry used the same letter for both positive and negative quantities. NEGAUNEE, m'-gn'm'-. A city in Marquette (ininty. Mich., three miles east of Ishpeming; on the Chicago and Xorthwestcrn and the Duluth, South Shore and Atlantic railroads (Map: Mich- igan, F 2). It is in the great iron region of the Male, on a ridge called (he "iron mountain,' at an elevation of about 1400 feet, and has several proiluctive irim mines within the iiuinicipal lim- its. Settled about 1870, Negaunee was incor- porated in 187."!, the charter of that year, as revised, now operating to provide for a mayor, annually elected, and a unicameral council. The water-works and electric light plant are owned and ojirratcd liv the citv. Population, in 1800, (in7S; in 1000. ('m."!.!. NEGLIGENCE (Lat. nenlifinttia, from neg- lifirns. pres. part, of nrgligere. neglcgcre. to neglect, from me, not -f lefiere, to gather). The omission to do something which a reasonable man guided by those considerations which ordi- narily regulate the conduit of human allairs would ilo. or iloing something which such a prudent anil reasonable man would not do. Such is a ju- dicial definition of the term, which is quoted by legal writers and judges more frequently than any other. Tt assumes, what is often ex- pressly stated in other definitions, that the thing OMiitted or done was in violation of a legal duty, and resulted in legal damage to the one to whom the duty was owed. The three elements to be eonijilered, then, are: (1) proper care; (2) legal duty; (."?) legal harm. Proper Cark. It will be observed that the utandard of care recognized by the definition is that which a reasonable man would exercise in a Riven situation. Whether such care has l)een taken or not is generally a question of fact for the jury. It is true that if the evidence is not conllicting — if the story of the plaintill' is the same as that of the defendant, and if, in the opinion of the court, reasonable men would draw but one inference from the evidence — the question of negligence will be decided by the court. Hence a court often nonsuits a plaintilf on the ground that his own evidence .shows that the harm of which he complains was not caused l>y any negli- gent act or omission of the defendant." As a rule, however, the jurj- are to determine whether the defendant's conduct was reasonably prudent or not. At the same time, the court is bound to explain to the jury the legal rules bearing upon the subject, of which the most important are these : When a person undertakes the performance of a task which reipiircs special skill, the failure to do Jill that any skillful person could reason- ably be expected to do in such a case, considering all the circumstances, will amount to actionable negligence. If an ordinary mechanic undertakes to clean or repair a vatcli, he is bound to do the work with the skill and care of the ordinary watch cleaner or repairer. The law does not presume negligence on the part of any one, and throws upon him who alleges that another has been negligent the burden of proving it. Accordingly, a person wlio has been injured by a runaway horse, or whose property has been destroyed by a fire which started on his neighbor's land, must show, not only that the horse ran away or the fire started, but that it was through the owner's fault. At times, however, the situation of the parties when the injury oc- curs is such as to overcome the ordinary presump- tion of care on the part of the defeiulant. To such a situation the maxim is ai)plied, res ipsa loijuilur — "the thing speaks for itself." A rail- road train jumps the tracks; a case of goods falls out of a warchcnisc window; or a jieck of live cinders is thiown out of a railroad engine of an elevated road upon a traveler in the street be- low; in each case we have a situation which would not exist, ordinarily, had the railroad company or the warehouseman exercised ordinary care. Hence the presumption of due care on his part is overcome, and judgment will pass against him unless he can show that, notwithstanding these appearances, he was reallj' without fault. Another important rule is that the amount of care required varies with the ap])arent risk. One sets fire to brush or rubbish upon his premises and the fire s|)re:ids to his neighbiu's land, doing dam- age and hurting another. Whether he aeteii negli- gently will depend upon various circumstances, such as these: Was the weather drv or damp? From what direction and with what vclocitv was the wind blowing? What vigilance and elTort did he exercise in trying to keep the fire on his own land? .Again, without warning, one throws an article from a scatTold to (he ground, hitting and hurting another. Whcdier he acted negli- gently will depend upon (he apparent risk inci- dent to (he act. If (he scalTold was adjoining a city street and the article was thrown into the (horoughfare, the act would be clearly negligent. On the other hand, if the scaffold overhung pri- vate premises, and there was no reason to believe that other persons were present, the act would be careful. In some cases the courts are disposed to hold